Pareto compliance from a practical point of view

Pareto compliance is a critical property of quality indicators (QIs) focused on measuring convergence to the Pareto front. This property allows a QI not to contradict the order imposed by the Pareto dominance relation. Hence, Pareto-compliant QIs are remarkable when comparing approximation sets of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) since they do not produce misleading conclusions. However, the practical effect of Pareto-compliant QIs as the backbone of MOEAs' survival mechanisms is not entirely understood. In this paper, we study the practical effect of IGD++ (which is a combination of IGD+ and the hypervolume indicator), IGD+, and IGD, which are Pareto-compliant, weakly Pareto-compliant, and not Pareto-compliant QIs, respectively. To this aim, we analyze the convergence and diversity properties of steady-state MOEAs based on the previously mentioned QIs throughout the whole evolutionary process. Our experimental results showed that, in general, the practical effect of a Pareto-compliant QI in a selection mechanism is not very significant concerning weaker QIs, taking into account the whole evolutionary process.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[2]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  A Survey on the Hypervolume Indicator in Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization , 2021, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  Xin Yao,et al.  Diversity Assessment in Many-Objective Optimization , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[4]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems , 2002, Genetic Algorithms and Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Solving Multiobjective Optimization Problems Using an Artificial Immune System , 2005, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[6]  Gary B. Lamont,et al.  Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems, Second Edition , 2007, Genetic and evolutionary computation series.

[7]  M. Hansen,et al.  Evaluating the quality of approximations to the non-dominated set , 1998 .

[8]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Riesz s-energy-based Reference Sets for Multi-Objective optimization , 2020, 2020 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[9]  Nicola Beume,et al.  SMS-EMOA: Multiobjective selection based on dominated hypervolume , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Eckart Zitzler,et al.  Evolutionary algorithms for multiobjective optimization: methods and applications , 1999 .

[11]  Xin Yao,et al.  of Birmingham Quality evaluation of solution sets in multiobjective optimisation , 2019 .

[12]  Michael T. M. Emmerich,et al.  Test Problems Based on Lamé Superspheres , 2007, EMO.

[13]  Michael T. M. Emmerich,et al.  On the construction of pareto-compliant quality indicators , 2019, GECCO.

[14]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Modified Distance Calculation in Generational Distance and Inverted Generational Distance , 2015, EMO.

[15]  E. Saff,et al.  Discretizing Manifolds via Minimum Energy Points , 2004 .

[16]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review , 2003, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..